3. Updated document generated following IISC meeting in San Diego. It was reviewed and revised list issued before Twelfth IISC September 92 meeting in Alberqueque.

Action - George to edit action list

Item 2 - GPS Information Package

4. Statens Kartverk have already distributed 50 copies. BB service details for Trimble (UK) and Ashtech in San Francisco to be added. The Admiralty List of Radio Signals Volume 2 now contains BB service information,.

Action - George to forward latest issue to meeting attendees

Item 3 - GPS Information Access Agreement

5. Necessity for agreements to ensure the reliability and continuity of information distribution questioned as US authorities already committed to provide same. Nevertheless, decision reached to submit CGSIC issue concerning confirmation of ongoing GPS Information distribution by the US authorities.

Action - Chairman/Secretary to forward issue enquiry

Item 4 - Active distribution

6. UKCSG reported on their recent meeting concerning implementation of a Semi-active distribution system. USCG have indicated their willingness to assist with any trials (see letter Annex B). Currently, Nottingham University staff having difficulty to contact Sprintnet and now attempting by electronic mail to do so. Apparently Sprintnet can initiate data distribution on a collect basis.

7. JPL may require GPS ' Active Distribution ' facility for the Deep Space Network. If so, they will probably request GPSIC Internet connection. George described Statens Kartverk experiences using Internet and the University of Berne Internet (IGS MAIL) System.

9. Hans provided copies of the latest POC list and described the current status of each contact point. When the cut off date for outstanding correspondence is reached. Existing list will be updated. Final list needed by Karen Van Dyke, Sectretary CGSIC and also GPSIC.

10. To restrict the distribution list following criteria will be applied.

(a) CGSIC/IISC meetings records distributed to persons who attend one of the previous two meetings. Absence for two consecutive meetings automatically leads to deletion of list entry unless there are reasons not to.

(b) Records distributed to identified national points of contact. Persons who are not nominated delegates or national representatives and who wish to receive meeting records but unable to attend meetings, should obtain records from their national point of contact or nominated delegate.

(c) Distribution will be withheld from national point of contacts which are considered inactive. The POC's allocated wait status until resuming active interest in IISC/CGSIC.

(D) Records distributed to relevant international organizations and transport/navigation authorities.

11. Japan (Ministry Posts and Telecommunications) have expressed strong IISC and CGSIC interest. Reply forwarded to their enquiry giving existing Japanese Points of Contact and other information. Enquiry demonstrates the need for introductory IISC package.

13. Can existing level of commitment by Subcommittee members and in particular the efforts by the Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary be maintained?. Consideration is required for the US to provide one of the Subcommittee officials and any changes incorporated in the IISC charter.

14. The ability to make representations about Civil GPS use to the US authorities is essential. Although the importance of CGSIC is perhaps slightly less than hitherto a need was perceived for IISC to continue, if only for international civil users to forward issues concerning GPS use.

15. The meeting recognized that IISC delegates are mainly self supporting, representing both private and public interests. Furthermore, some delegates are without government backing or endorsement.

16. It is essential to prioritize IISC tasks and actions. The subcommittee has limited resources, financial, secretarial etc. Therefore, decision taken only to process necessary and important items. In particular, maintain Information Package, create final Point of Contact list, raise and track issues concerning Civil GPS users, check and monitor GPSIC developments related to information distribution,. Also IISC should be a discussion forum for Civil GPS use, BB system operation and related Integrity Monitor applications.

17. Secretary informed meeting of potential liaison with Wild Goose Association (Loran C), International Omega Association and proposed International Navigation Association (understood to be merger of Wild Goose and Omega Associations), also US GPS industry Council.

18. Prospect of creating International GPS Association discussed but dimension outside current IISC remit. It would require financial support from members etc, with the necessity for either part of full time officials and creation of appropriate secretariat. Also as IISC incorporated within CGSIC then US authorities must be approached to establish their reaction to any hard proposals.

19. Decision reached to obtained more information about the other radionavigational associations. Furthermore establish if they have any proposals to absorb or support IISC. However, US GPS Industry Council should be excluded because it probably represents national US interests and organizations.

20. Both Hans van der Wal and Walter Blanchard have submitted proposals for reorganization of IISC and CGSIC. There is now perhaps a need to redefine the areas of CGSIC interest, and also create a working party to generate items of interest to GPS Civil Users.

22. Walter Blanchards submission was discussed in detail. In response to his document, the following list of recommendations were complied.

(a) The IISC is performing a valuable function and should be encouraged to continue until some more formal organization can take over (which might be a re-constituted IISC itself). Partial IISC charter revision is required, recognizing potential CGSIC reorganization. Furthermore, re-drawing its Charter on a smaller but realistic scale would be beneficial. There is no point in having unachievable objectives. Therefore IISC should continue and discuss items within remit.

(b) Until longer-term arrangements can be made, IISC meetings should be arranged to cost attendees as little as possible. Co-organization with major conferences is valuable. Suggest two CGSIC meetings per year for next two years, linked to ION technical meetings. Further review meeting frequency September 1994.

(c) IISC should not attempt to be a world-wide GPS propaganda vehicle but should restrict itself to representing the views of active delegates. Thus, it should not burden itself with distributing minutes or other material to numerous countries most of which have shown no interest.

(d) NATO countries have special interests in GPS consequent on their MOU's. These interests need separate treatment from those of non-NATO countries. Therefore, if IISC continues to be chartered to cover all non-US nations then a separate NATO-countries only civil committee could be created. However, if civilian NATO users wish to meet, they are free to do so.

(e) IISC should concentrate on representing interests, aims and objectives of active and supportive international Civil Users. Especially those who actively participate in IISC proceedings. The CGSIC should consider limited funding if it considers the IISC to be of value. It would add strength to attempts by non - US organizations to obtain national government funding. Alternative funding methods should be considered.

(f) Request US to advise their perspective for continued IISC activity. US formal guidance may be required perhaps providing a Subcommittee officer who is authorized to attend any IISC meetings outside US. GPSIC and US DOT participation in IISC considered essential.

(g) IISC to maintain POC list and provide same with edits to CGSIC Secretary and placed on known bulletin boards. IISC meeting record only forwarded to Task Action personnel, US DOT and Subcommittee officers.

(h) If necessary, urge US DOT to forward detains of CGSIC to equivalent Department of Transport authorities in other countries and appropriate international organizations. Furthermore, suggest US authorities should encourage CGSIC participation by individuals, countries and international organizations.

In addition to the two formal letters you mentioned concerning active distribution, I would include my letter to you Ser/139 dated 19 July 1991. This letter was written in response to IISC's request for Coast Guard review of the minutes from the Eighth meeting held in Washington, DC on 5 June 1991.
this letter discussed several items which are still relevant to the Coast Guard's interaction with the IISC.

I am prepared to consider your proposal for an international distribution medium. As I have said in the past, my major concerns are that there is no cost to the U.S. Government and the additional distribution efforts on the part of the GPSIC staff would be kept to a minimum. The information deposited into the international distribution point would consist of the same information sent to existing distribution media (daily status message; almanacs; precise ephermeris data; and NANUs) with the same update frequency.

After a cursory investigation of the efforts required to add Transit information to the GPSIC BBS, I have decided not todo this. The USNO BBS already offers 5 different Transit related products. Should this change or if we can obtain the Transit information directly from its operational control point, I will reconsider adding the data. To assist me in this process it would be helpful to know which Transit products you need and the estimated number of customers desiring those products.

As always, I appreciate the effort of the IISC. I regret not being able to meet with you in Delft, but hope to see you in Alberqueque.